Introduction

Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 3

LG1 | Core Concepts:

Basic Process ............................................................................................................................ 5

LR1 | Core Concepts:

Introdoction to Arguments | Premise/Conclusion & Valid/Invalid ......... 21

RC1 | Core Concepts:

Basic Process ....................................................................................................................... 29

LG2 | Core Concepts:

Conditional Logic and Grouping Games ................................................................. 43

LR2 | Core Concepts:

Conditional Reasoning ................................................................................................... 57

LSAT Strategy Guide 1

 Introduction

Introduction
The core lessons in this strategy guide are presented to assist in your review of the essential
details of the course. We will go through the information presented here in more detail during
the course.
This strategy guide IS NOT a substitute for attending the course and does not discuss the
lessons and theories beyond the first two weeks of the course.

Thank you for trusting us to assist you with the LSAT!

We look forward to working with you.

LSAT Strategy Guide 3

 Core Concepts | LG1

LG1 | Core Concepts

This is usually the most intimidating but easiest to learn section.

Logic Games / Analytical Reasoning

Method (broken down into two parts):

1. Four Step Information Extraction Process.

2. Three Question Types: List, Local, and Non Local.

Prior to reviewing the process, please attempt the game on page 176 for 3 minutes. Trying
the game without a process will help us appreciate how much having a process can help.

LSAT Strategy Guide 5

 LG1 | Core Concepts

Part I: Four Step Information Extraction Process

Step 1: The Stimulus

• The “stimulus” is the first paragraph we see on a logic games question.
• The stimulus provides background information necessary to complete the game.
○○ It tells us the variables we will be examining and the broad framework regarding what
we will be doing with the variables (e.g., putting them in order, putting them in groups,
etc.).

• The stimulus is often ignored, regardless of whether a person is new to this

process or experienced with it.
○○ On the LSAT, questions are usually on the experimental section for many years prior
to becoming a “real” test question.
○○ Before a question becomes an actual test question, it is likely that over 100,000 people
have taken that question. Consequently, the question that makes the actual test has
been through more than a few viewings and has been refined.

There is no fat in the stimulus. If something is there, it is there for a reason.

The Four Step Information Extration Process

Step 1: Write the Stimulus Rules
• Write out the stimulus rules on the bottom left hand side of the page, just under the initial
questions.
• It is important to remember that the stimulus is the primary mechanism we use in
determining the structure of our universal diagram (Step 2).

Example – Page 176

TV Programs: H, J, L, P, Q, S, V
• All different rank
• Arranged 1st thru 7th
• From Most to Least popular

6 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | LG1

The Universal Diagram

• The “Universal Diagram” is a visual representation of what must be true for our game.
○○ The universal diagram is not a place for possibilities, only conclusions we can validly
arrive at.

The Four Step Information Extration Process

Step 2: Draw out the Universal Diagram
• The Universal Diagram should be written adjacent to the Stimulus (and later, Indented)
Rules. So put the diagram beside the rules and leave lots of space underneath.

Example – Page 176

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

LSAT Strategy Guide 7

 LG1 | Core Concepts

The Indented Rules

• The Indented Rules are found under the Stimulus Rules. They are indented.

The Four Step Information Extration Process

Step 3: Write out the Indented Rules
• This will take a while to master. Learning to write the rules that the LSAT offers you, or
could offer you, in a precise and efficient manner requires going over many different rule
types.
• This will happen over time. But learning to write the rules efficiently is essential.

Example – Page 176

H<J&L

• This is a “sequencing rule.”

○○ A sequencing rule just means that the rule indicates there is some order between the
variables.

• We use the greater than and less than sign because it is precise.
○○ The Kaplan “…” and other methods that use dashes are not usually worth their
simplicity. It is worthwhile to learn to use the signs. But it’s not a big deal early. Use
whatever you’re comfortable with early on.

8 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | LG1

• For almost every sequencing rule, there will be two negations.

○○ Negations mean the variables under the universal diagram are ‘knocked out’ to indicate
that their presence at that spot is not possible.
○○ E.g. (I cross out the variables, just using the classic negation sign as a result of my
limited word processing abilities)

Example – Page 176

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

~J ~H ~H

~L

1. J<Q
2. L<S&V
3. Q<P&S
4. S =/= 7

○○ The diagram at the end of your Indented Rules should look like:

Example – Page 176

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

~J ~H ~H

~L ~J

~Q ~L ~L

~S ~Q ~Q

~V ~S

~P

LSAT Strategy Guide 9

 LG1 | Core Concepts

The Basic Deduction Rule

• Whenever a variable is mentioned more than once in the indented rules, then combine
those rules.

The Four Step Information Extration Process

Step 4: Make Deductions
• In order to make deductions, apply the Basic Deduction Rule.
○○ It is very important that we slowly go through the deduction process. We learn that
transitive chains, in particular, may seem complicated at first but get easy quickly. It’s
important for us to believe we can do this (and we can).

Example — Page 176

• Let us find the first variable mentioned twice in the Indented Rules.

○○ That variable ends up being “J”. So I say “let’s just write down ‘J’”.

• After you write down “J” ask, “so what do we know about ‘J?’”

○○ We know J is after H and before Q. Then show them that means:

H<J<Q

• This is our first transitive chain. Transitive chains are the type of thing that we screw up
the first time we do it, we screw up the second time we do it, but the sixth time we do it,
we find it so easy we cannot believe anyone could ever screw up on it.

• Continue the chain, slowly adding the rules until you have:

H<J<Q<P&S
H<L<S&V

• After we have shown the completed transitive chain, we are not done.

○○ Now we use the transitive chain to increase the negations.

10 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | LG1

• When complete your diagram should look like this:

_H_ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

~J ~H ~H

~L ~J ~J ~J

~Q ~Q ~L ~L

~S ~S ~S ~S ~Q ~Q

~V ~V ~S

~P ~P ~P

○○ This is the kind of information a top student starts their game with. Let’s
compare it to what we initially wrote down. This is an example of the difference a
single mastered process can make.

LSAT Strategy Guide 11

 LG1 | Core Concepts

Part II: Three Question Types

Question Type 1: List Questions

• Definition: A “List Question” refers to a question stem that asks “what could be” a
possible assortment of all the variables in the game; it is usually the first question in a logic
game.

• Process: We use a Rules-Based Approach to solving this question.

○○ We take the first indented rule and head toward the answer choices.

○○ We scan the answer choices to insure that the first indented rule is correctly applied.

○○ As soon as we find the first indented rule incorrectly applied, we cross out that
answer choice and begin to apply the second indented rule.

○○ This process is continued until there is only one answer choice.

○○ It should be noted that, on rare occasions, we need to take a second trip through our
indented rules to obtain the answer.

Warning: the process is deceptively simple but there are myriad ways to do it incorrectly, all of which
costs time and/or precision. We need to very slowly and comprehensively go through how to solve this
question type at least twice, despite its ostensible simplicity.

• Here are some common mistakes that are often made when applying this process:

○○ Applying the rule we think is “easiest” first. This may lead us to miss an indented rule
since we are not going in order. It serves no benefit.

○○ Applying each rule to every answer choice. This is a waste of valuable seconds.

○○ Checking the answer choices against the rules. This will waste a significant amount of
time, perhaps even approaching 30 seconds for this single question. The proper way to
apply the process is to compare the rules against the answer choices.

12 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | LG1

Example — Page 176 (Question #1)

• Take the first indented rule (that H is before J & L) and see where it is violated by
an answer choice. This rule violates answer choice “A”. Strike “A” and then move on to
the next rule (not the next answer choice!).
• Take the second indented rule (J<Q) and find it knocks out “B”.
At this point, you may ask “does this mean you only apply each rule to one answer choice?”
To ensure you have a thorough understanding of this process, especially since these are the
easiest points on the test, make sure you go through every rule until that rule knocks out
an answer choice. If it happens on “A”, you’re done with the rule on “A”; if it happens on
“D”, then you’re done with the rule on “D”.
• Third indented rule (L < S & V) knocks out “D”.
• Fourth indented rule (Q < P & S) knocks out nothing.
• Fifth indented rule (S =/= 7) knocks out “E”. Therefore, C is our answer.

LSAT Strategy Guide 13

 LG1 | Core Concepts

Question Type 2: Local Questions

• The first three parts of this process are fairly simple and even slightly redundant. We’re
learning basic deductions. The most difficult (and most important) concept in this module
is the fourth step: the “Square of Opposites” Approach. That step is a game changer.

○○ It can be used at any time, on any logic game, to, 100% guaranteed, get us the correct
answer. But it’s a bit tougher to understand and can be a slower process even those
who understand the approach conceptually but have not yet acquired mechanical
fluidity. Fortunately, the likelihood that you will master the square of opposites, if
practicing and willing to review mistakes, hovers near 100%.

• Definition: A “local” question refers to a question stem that adds a rule or information.
• Process: There is a four step process for all local questions
1. Write the rule(s): Both write the rule and put it into a diagram to visually access the
information.

2. Make Deduction(s): Use the “Deduction Rule” (i.e., whenever a variable is

mentioned more than once in the indented rules, combine the rules).

3. Check Answer Choices

4. Square of Opposites Approach: The square of Opposites Approach is the most

complicated thing to learn in this part. It is a tool often associated with Aristotle
that attempts to teach how to assess valid arguments. The square of opposites is
complicated, but everyone manages to master it. It normally takes about 5 days of
practice to master the approach.
Square of Opposites Approach Definition: Write hypotheticals using the square of
opposites and working from wrong to right on all “must be” questions while working
directly to right on all “could be” questions.
Well, that made no sense to anyone, so let’s break it down.
Must be True Must be False

Could be True Could be False

14 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | LG1

How to Properly Hunt for the Wrong Answers

• First recognize that if you do not get the deduction on a “must be” question,
there are ZERO possible ways to directly get the answer (other than doing all the
hypothetical permutations, which is not possible due to time constraints). We need to
understand this in order to guarantee us right answers. And we have had lots of success
teaching this concept to a wide variety of people, including people who started their LSAT
adventures in the 120s. It’s learnable.

• Understanding the power of “Opposites” in logic: It is very important we understand

the concept of “opposites” in logic. Logical opposites must encompass the entire world
of possibility. So the opposite of “hot” is not, contrary to popular opinion, “cold”.
Because then where does “warm” fall? The opposite of “rich” is not “poor.” Where would
“middle class” fall? Instead, the opposite of “hot” is “not hot”; the opposite of “rich” is
“not rich”. These opposites guarantee that all possibilities are accounted for.

• Opposites in the Square of Opposites: To say something “must be true” is to say that
one of the answer choices must be correct in all possible hypotheticals given the rules
in this game. That’s the traditional way to view the question. What we need to do is to
recognize that the “must be true” question is also saying “four of these answer choices are
the opposite of ‘must be true’ and that opposite is ‘could be false’.” We need to search for
the “could be false” answers because we have a chance of finding those.

• While you cannot directly get the answer, you CAN find the wrong answers. Test
the answer choices, in order, by asking the opposite of the question stem on all “must be”
questions.

• Slowly going through the examples is especially necessary here.

Example — Page 176 (Question #2)

• Question #2 is a local question as indicated by the fact that it asks us to stipulate that
“J < L” and “S < P” for this question.

• Step 1: Write ‘J < L’ and ‘S < P’.

• Step 2: Applying the deduction rule. Because all these variables have been used, we’ll just
pick the first new rule (J < L) and ask “what else do I know about these two variables?”

Well, we know H < J and L < S&V. So we currently know:

H<J<L<S&V

Then we ask, well, what are our other variables? (Q & P). What do we know about those
variables? We know J < Q and Q < P. So now we just add that information and have:
H<J<L<S&V
<Q<S<P

LSAT Strategy Guide 15

 LG1 | Core Concepts

• Step 3: As you can see from the transitive chain posted above, ‘H’ must be first and ‘J’
must be second. Therefore, answer choice “A” is the correct response.

• Step 4: In the interest of showcasing the power of the square of opposites, we are going
to show what happens if we fail at Steps 1 thru 3. Let’s assume we did not make any
deduction, thus we could not pick an answer. And now, we are at the square of opposites
step. Here is what we do:

o Acknowledge that since this is a ‘must be true’ question, we are going to test the
answer choices, using hypotheticals, to see whether those answer choices ‘could be
false’ (i.e., the opposite of ‘must be true’). We are going to search for the wrong
answers.

o Since we know the answer is ‘A’, we are not going to test ‘A’ first. Instead, we’ll test ‘C’.
So let’s see if “it could be false” that “L is third”. To test this, we will put ‘L’ anywhere
but the third position and try our best to get this hypothetical to work. “If I can put ‘L’
somewhere other than third and not violate a rule, then I know this answer choice, ‘C’, could be false
and I can knock it out.” You will also see that the hypothetical provides other benefits.

o How the initial testing diagram should look

_H_ ___ ___ _L_ ___ ___ ___

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

○○ Then say, “Well, what do I know about ‘L”? We know that ‘L’ must be before S & V.

_H_ ___ ___ _L_ _S_ ___ _V_

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

○○ Do not to worry about whether all the rules are being followed. Follow the first one
you think about. If a rule is violated, you will catch it during the review portion of this
step. Just write out the hypotheticals even in the face of indecision. Put your pencil to
paper! Attack!

16 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | LG1

○○ Continue the process of asking, “What else do we know about these variables?”
Well, we know ‘S < P’ (so ‘P’ will need to be in 6) and we know J & Q are the other
variables, with J < Q. So the final diagram of the hypothetical looks like:

_H_ _J_ _Q_ _L_ _S_ _P_ _V_

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

▪▪ Now review this hypothetical. Go through the indented and local rules and make
sure it does not violate any of them (it doesn’t.)

○○ Put a check mark beside any valid hypothetical. This will expedite another logic
games process we will learn about shortly called “Hypothetical Sweeps.”

Please note that this hypothetical proves that answer choice “C” could be false (and is thus a
wrong answer). It also proves that answer choices “B” and “E” could be false. With this one
hypothetical, we have knocked out sixty percent of the answer choices and created a piece of
work that will help us later.

○○ Go through the example for Answer Choice “D”. After this, it should be clear that
“A” is the answer. Go through a hypothetical of Answer Choice A, asking yourself
if the answer choice could be false - this should prove that you cannot get a working
hypothetical when you ask the opposite of the right answer. After doing the opposite
of what the question stem asks when testing a particular answer choice, if we get a
valid hypothetical, it means that is the WRONG answer.

▪▪ This may seem like a counter-intuitive process. Most people have been taught to
find the right answer since they started schooling. This concept of going on the
hunt for wrong answers will seem foreign at first. Don’t be afraid to go through
this process slowly.

LSAT Strategy Guide 17

 LG1 | Core Concepts

Question Type 3: Non-Local Questions

• Definition: A “non-local” question refers to a question stem that does not add a rule or
information.
○○ For every subsequent question following the first (generally, “List”) question, the first thing you want
to do is ask, “Is this a local or non-local question?”

▪▪ Depending on the answer to that query a student should then immediately

delve into either the four step local question process or this three step non-local
question process.

• Process: There is a three step process for all non-local questions.

1. Check your Universal Diagram: All of the deductions you made at the beginning of
the game often benefit us.

2. Complete a Hypothetical Sweep: This is a new process

a. Definition: A hypothetical sweep is using your past work to tell us what “could
be true” is this game.

b. Examples and an understanding of opposites in logic will help us learn how to

apply this step.

c. You can get perfect on this section without mastering this step, but this step
makes so many difficult questions considerably easier.

3. Square of Opposites Approach: Exact same process for this step as in Step #4 of
Local Rule Questions.

18 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | LG1

Example — Page 176 (Question #3)

• Question #3 is a non-local question as indicated by the fact that it does not add a rule or
information. “Which of the following cannot be third” just asks us what is possible given
the global rules.

○○ Step 1: Check the Universal Diagram. Here is a reminder of what our universal
diagram looks like.

_H_ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

~J ~H ~H

~L ~J ~J ~J

~Q ~Q ~L ~L

~S ~S ~S ~S ~Q ~Q

~V ~V ~S

~P ~P ~P

▪▪ As we can see from a quick review of the diagram, the variables ‘H’, ‘S’, and ‘P’ all
cannot be in the third position. Therefore, answer choice E (i.e., variable P) is the
correct answer. Super quick.

○○ Step 2: Let us assume we did not get the answer in Step 1. In fact, let’s assume Step 1
is a bust, as it sometimes will be. Let’s do a hypothetical sweep.

▪▪ The first thing we need to do is find a valid hypothetical. All ‘valid hypothetical’
means is an assortment of the variables that does not break the rules. The first
place we can find a valid hypothetical is our first question (the ‘List’ question). We
picked answer choice ‘C’ and said that assortment of variables could be correct.
Looking at that hypothetical we see that variable “Q” is third. Therefore, ‘Q’ could
be third and will not be the correct answer choice for this question. Therefore,
answer choice “C” in question #3 is incorrect.

▪▪ Find your next hypothetical. It should be the one we have written out to test out
the square of opposites, answer choice D, in question #2. It will indicate that ‘L’
could be third. Therefore, answer choice “A” in question #3 is incorrect.

We have taken away 40% of the answer choices without doing a lick of additional work.
This is the benefit to learning hypothetical sweeps.

LSAT Strategy Guide 19

 LG1 | Core Concepts

○○ Step 3: We also want to see how to apply the Square of Opposites Approach on this
question. Start with the assumption that we failed in Step 1 but succeeded in Step
2 (we could assume failure in Step 2 and get the right answer too, it would just be a
longer process); here’s how to test out this hypothetical using this Approach.

▪▪ Remember that the term “Cannot be” always means “Must be False” on the Logic
Games. In order to test out a question with a “must be false” stem, we need to do
the opposite, and see if the answer choices “could be true.” This is a much easier
way to test hypotheticals than ‘Must be True’ questions. All we need to do is take
the answer choice, plug it into a hypothetical and figure out whether it could work
with the rules. If it could, then it could be true and is the wrong answer since this
is a ‘Must be False’ question.

▪▪ E.g. 3(b)
_H_ _L_ _J_ _Q_ _V_ _S_ _P_

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

• This shows that ‘J’ could be third. Therefore, answer choice ‘B’ is incorrect.
_H_ _L_ _V_ _J_ _Q__ _S_ _P_

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

• This example shows that ‘V’ could be third. Therefore, answer choice ‘D’ is
incorrect. Therefore, answer choice ‘E’ is correct.

Conclusion
We now have basic processes to engage ANY logic game. However, let’s remind ourselves
that just like someone might be able to explain how to pirouette or how to take a wrist shot,
until we do it a thousand times, we only have a conceptual understanding of those tasks.
And, for this, a conceptual understanding is not sufficient. Not for what we are competing to
accomplish. So we need to practice the process. Not practice logic games. We need to practice
the process and struggle to gain an understanding.

20 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | LR1

LR1 | Core Concepts

Goals
1. Recognize LR is the most important section.
2. Learn basic question answering process.
3. Define Arguments and Statements of Fact.
4. Discuss Validity.
5. Adress Premise/Conclusion Keywords.
6. Put Theory into Practice.

Makeup and Importance of the Logical Reasoning Section

• The logical reasoning is the most important section on the test because it will encompass
two graded sections on the LSAT—one more than any other section type.
• Each section is 25 or 26 questions. It will make up approximately half of your
LSAT score.
• Each section can be further divided into question types based on:

(1) Category of Question (e.g., Assumption, Inference, etc.); and/or

(2) Difficulty (As a rule: Q 1-10 = easy; Q 11-19 = medium; Q 20+ = hard)

There has always been at least one LR section in the first three sections on every LSAT I
have ever seen.

• Each question is worth the exact same amount for the purposes of scoring. As a
result, your priority should be to finish and learn the easy/medium questions first since
those questions are most likely to be answered correctly.

LSAT Strategy Guide 21

 LR1 | Core Concepts

Basic Question Answering Process: Five Step Process

The Highlander Method

1. Read and Divide Stimulus (Into Premise/Conclusion)
2. Read Question Stem
3. Paraphrase Answer if immediate
4. Eliminate Wrong or least favored Answers
5. Settle on Best Remaining Option

• The purpose of the process is to save time and minimize sloppy mistakes.
• Speed Rule: Never spend more than 10 seconds assessing an answer choice on the first
pass through. If you do not understand the answer choice in 10 seconds, leave it and
come back after examining the other answer choices.
• Some organizations suggest that you read the question stem prior to reading the stimulus.
While teachers of the LSAT gain a lot from the question stem, most people are not
sufficiently familiar with the test to find the question stem useful until very late in their
studies … well after they have developed a stimulus first habit!
• However, whether to read the stimulus or question stem first is, primarily, a question of
idiosyncratic comfort. Whichever way you feel most comfortable arranging Steps 1 and 2,
you should do. Over the course of a sufficient study period you should try both methods.
• For highly experienced students who understand the ramifications of a question category
(e.g., already know with a degree of specificity precisely what the question is asking), it is
probably better to read the stem first.

22 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | LR1

Arguments vs. Statements of Fact

• Every stimulus on the LR section is one of two things: an Argument or
a Statement of Fact.
• Approximately 85-90% of stimuli are Arguments. Approximately 10-15% of stimuli are
Statements of Fact. The vast majority of stimuli in this section are arguments. Moreover,
they are invalid arguments (a concept we will get to later).

In order to understand the Logical Reasoning section, we must understand ‘arguments.’ And to
understand arguments, we must understand the different parts of an argument. That is why you are
being provided this information. Pay attention to why you are learning this information.
Many organizations hand out a list with premise and conclusion keywords, but sometimes even the
instructors have no idea why they do it. We must realize that before we can decide if an argument is
“valid” or “logical”, we must know what an argument is and how we can dissect it.

• What is the difference between a Statement of Fact and an Argument?

o Answer: The only difference is an argument has a conclusion.

Anatomy of an Argument:

Every argument MUST be made up of two parts:

1. Premise(s)

2. Conclusion(s)

Most arguments have an additional part called Assumption(s).

LSAT Strategy Guide 23

 LR1 | Core Concepts

Premise(s) + Assumption(s) = Conclusion(s)

Premise:
• A premise is:
1. A statement made in support of a conclusion; and
2. Acts as evidence for the conclusion.

• We assume the truth of the premises ONLY for the purposes of assessing the validity of the
argument. This means the correct response to any question will virtually never be that a
premise is incorrect. It is more likely that incorrect deductions are being gleaned from
premises.

Assumption:
• An assumption is:
○○ An unstated premise that is necessary in order for an argument to be made valid or
complete.
▪▪ The unstated part is important to emphasize.

Conclusion:
• The main point and/or the most support point.
○○ There can be more than one conclusion in an argument. In those cases, ask which
conclusion is the most supported point and which conclusion is doing the supporting.
The one being most supported is the main conclusion while the supporting comment
is a subsidiary conclusion.
○○ There is no limit to the number of subsidiary conclusions an argument can contain.
However, the vast majority of LR questions contain only one conclusion.

24 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | LR1

The Concept of “Validity” and its Central Role on the LSAT

• In order to improve our reasoning capabilities we have to know what is meant by “logical
reasoning.”
○○ Reasoning on the LSAT refers to the proper application of what could be
appropriately titled Aristotelian logic.*
○○ Unfortunately, such a title would scare students off and compel many to (incorrectly)
believe logic is outside their capacity.
○○ Basic logic is accessible to virtually every student even though the unfamiliar verbiage
may cause some initial fear.
* Aristotle was the third in a line of philosophers who are widely recognized as forming the foundation
of contemporary Western thought. His goal was to create a system or a set of rules so that all arguments
could effectively engage in the pursuit of truth.

• Logic is an attempt to create a universal language built for the purpose of establishing
universal truths. Sophists* do not believe universal truth exists thus the perpetuation of a
language that seeks to establish what does not exist is delusional and deceptive.
* Aristotle’s ideological enemies, The Sophists, did not believe “truth” existed outside of what you could
convince someone about. Their focus on oratory and persuasion, rather than measured advancement
or achievement, bothered Aristotle who thought it was a belief that was both untrue and socially and
individually harmful.

• We do not need to pick a side to recognize that both streams of thought have survived
thousands of years of an intense ideological war that continues to this day; the next time
we think a Reading Comprehension question is taking a while, let’s remember how long
the world has spent on the question of whether truth even exists and that is merely a
true/false question, it does not even have five answer choices.)

• The concept of “Validity” is key to the system. Aristotle defined a valid argument as “a
discourse in which certain (specific) things having been supposed, something different
from the things supposed results of necessity because these things are so,” which
is a flowery way of saying sometimes when we combine two pieces of information
(“Premises”), we can come up with a new piece of information we now know to be true.
○○ For instance, if I know that Miley Cyrus is super cute (Premise #1) and Dylan is
willing to date anyone who is super cute (Premise #2) then we can come to the
conclusion that Dylan would date Miley Cyrus (Conclusion #1).
○○ We would not be able to determine the conclusion with just one of those pieces of
information.

LSAT Strategy Guide 25

 LR1 | Core Concepts

• Since understanding validity is so important, we want to take a comprehensive approach

to learn this concept - first reminding ourselves of the definition of valid and invalid
arguments.
○○ A valid argument is an argument where the conclusion must be true if we assume the
premises are true.
○○ An invalid argument is an argument where the conclusion could be false even if we
assume all of the premises are true.
○○ Most arguments, on the LSAT and in real life, are invalid arguments.

• Looking at arguments as “valid” or “invalid” is very different than looking at them as

“good” or “unconvincing.” As a result of the confusion that will result from changing
the method of evaluating arguments, we will use a number of example arguments and
worksheets to supplement our explanations.

26 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | LR1

The Differences between a “Good” argument and a “Valid” argument

1. The premises in a valid argument, without any outside assistance or information, must
guarantee that everything about the conclusion is 100% true.
○○ Imagine you walk into a bar and get into an argument about ‘who is the greatest
hockey player of all time?’ And a patron makes this argument:
▪▪ Premise (1): Wayne Gretzky has scored more points than any other hockey player.
▪▪ Premise (2): Wayne Gretzky has won more championships than any other hockey player.
▪▪ Conclusion: Therefore, Wayne Gretzky is the greatest hockey player to have every played.
• In a bar, this would probably be considered a ‘good’ argument. The
patron is providing solid reasons for their conclusion. And most people
would even agree with the patron’s argument. However, this is an invalid
argument and would be considered a flawed argument for the purposes of
the LSAT.
• The reason the above argument is flawed is because, even if the premises
were both true (we always assume the truth of the premises for determining validity),
the conclusion does not need to be true. There is nothing in the premises
that requires Gretzky to be the greatest of all time.

○○ Juxtapose the above argument with one of the first syllogisms (valid arguments)
taught to introductory logic students:
▪▪ Premise (1): Socrates is a man
▪▪ Premise (2): All men are mortal
▪▪ Conclusion: Socrates is mortal
• The two premises in the syllogism guarantee the truth of the conclusion.
• Therefore, it is a valid argument.

2. Any argument is to be viewed as a self-contained unit

○○ You will never require knowledge beyond what a sixth grader would be expected
to know about the natural world. You will never need to know who the President
was or who first landed on the moon, but you would be expected to know that
grass is green and an alligator is a reptile.
○○ Remember that an argument is a self-contained unit. There is no outside
information you require (or even should use) in order to determine validity of
the argument. The reason the conclusion does not need to be true is because the
concept of “greatest hockey player” is never discussed in the premises.
○○ For the purpose of examining the validity of an argument, we assume the truth of the
premises. This is not to say that the premises are true, it just means we assume they
are true when we are evaluating whether the conclusion must follow from them.

LSAT Strategy Guide 27

 LR1 | Core Concepts

NOTES

28 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | RC1

RC1 | Core Concepts

Goals
1. Introduce the Reading Comprehension Section type.
2. Understand the learnable skills that are required for proficiency
3. Teach students basic passage reading process.
4. Put Theory into Practice.

Reading Comprehension: A Test of a Student’s Will

• Reading Comprehension is a section made up of four academic passages of about
400-500 words that are accompanied by between 26-28 questions. Test takers will have
35 minutes to complete the section.
• Traditionally, test takers are expected to spend approximately 8 minutes and 45 seconds
reading and answering the questions for a passage. Depending on the particular passage,
the expected time may be slightly lower or higher. Approximately 4 minutes is to be spent
reading the passage and 4.5 minutes spent answering the questions.

Too many test takers rush through the reading hoping to check back on the reading during
the questions. This is not an effective way to complete this section. We need to learn to
effectively read and extract information from the passages in the time allotted.

• In a month or two, we will, essentially, be re-wiring how you have been reading and
understanding material since you first learned to read, which is fraught with challenges that
the other sections do not have to deal with.
○○ It is an uphill battle but reaching the summit makes it all worthwhile.
○○ INSTRUCTOR NOTE: “This was my worst section after my initial practice and
it is the only section I got perfect on test day. I have experienced, and we have
seen, numerous people put in the effort necessary to transform their reading
comprehension scores through sincere and intense focus and practice.”

LSAT Strategy Guide 29

 RC1 | Core Concepts

The Five Elements

• There are five distinct abilities, listed in order of importance, we seek to strengthen in
order to improve a reading comprehension score.
1. Attitude/Psychology – How one reacts to/feels about the section.*
2. Short-Term Memory – How much information one can retain.
3. Vocabulary – Knowledge of word definitions and idiom use.
4. Conceptual Understanding -- Grasp of well-known concepts (e.g., climate change,
GDP, abolitionist movements, etc.)
5. Reasoning – One’s ability to recognize cause and effect as well as conditional
reasoning.
* We will discuss all of the elements over time, but, on the first day of reading
comprehension, we need to bring the issue of Attitude to the forefront because a positive
attitude is more important than any other skill a person can develop. Bad attitudes will, with
no doubt, inhibit potential improvement without our even realizing a problem exists.

Changing Attitudes: Use lies, use truth, use whatever you can!
Deng Xiaoping, a former leader of China, once said: “It does not matter if a cat is black or white, as
long as it catches mice.”
• Here is our main problem:
1. Many/most of us hate doing reading comprehension sections
2. Disliking a task is shown to decrease our proficiency

• Many people enjoy reading and you may like some of the passages, but very few people
enjoy reading four complicated passages and being tested about intricate details and
ramifications of arguments in a tight time limit.

• People typically do not enjoy this process because:

1. They are not used to it; the way we need to read and acquire information for this test
is different than reading a magazine, novel, or even a textbook.

2. They will need to read material they otherwise would not.

▪▪ For example, outside of the LSAT, many people’s proclivity to researching art
history is limited. It is not a topic that naturally aligns with most people’s other
interests.

▪▪ For others, that topic may be economics or science or general history, but all
people will be reading things they find less interesting.

30 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | RC1

So how do we solve this problem?

Two ways:
1. Lie to Yourself, if necessary

○○ Yep, you read that right. Regardless of your actual feelings, tell yourself that “this
is the most fascinating thing I am going to get to read. I cannot wait to get to
understand it!” As hokey-pokey as this sounds, the strategy is effective for inducing
increased focused. And while it sounds silly, it’s merely a rational extrapolation of
what we already know about classical conditioning remember Pavlov’s dog?

○○ Some of you have probably read about experiments where a subject is asked to hold a
pencil between their teeth and smile. What has been discovered in these experiments is
that the act of smiling makes people happier! This is the opposite causal relationship
that most of us assume (i.e., we think we smile because we are happy, not that we
are happy because we smile). The truth is that, probably as a result of classical
conditioning, whenever we smile our body assumes it has just undergone a happy event.
Your body does so because, the vast majority of the time you have smiled in your
life, you have just gone through a happy event. So your body is primed to recognize
the consequent of the happy event as an indication that the happy event occurred. It
“feels” (i.e., the relevant chemicals are released into the bloodstream) happier.

In short: “Fake it till you Make it” has some science behind it. And we can use that science on this test.

○○ Should we NEED to lie to ourselves to be happy about practicing RC? Maybe we

should recognize our blessings and be grateful that this is the type of struggle our
grandparents have allowed us to have. That their struggles were likely much harder
in a myriad of ways we would consider nearly inhumane by today’s standards. Maybe
relative opportunity should motivate us?

○○ Should we perhaps feel fortunate and energized to be living in a country with,

arguably, the world’s highest standard of living? While living in that country we are
one of the rare few that is seriously competing for a pinnacle position in that country.
Should perhaps a mixture of guilt and gratitude motivate us?

○○ Perhaps all these considerations can elevate our appreciation for the opportunity to
improve our lot in life by taking a test. I hope you find your special fuel. And, while
you are searching for it, keeping a positive attitude will assist you in being more
proficient in these tasks. By genuinely telling yourself that the passage is fascinating,
regardless of your original feelings, you can improve your focus and attitude.

LSAT Strategy Guide 31

 RC1 | Core Concepts

2. Tell Yourself the Truth

○○ For some, the lies are not enough - for a variety of reasons, some people will not or
cannot lie to themselves
○○ As an example of “telling yourself the truth”, here is an honest conversation that your
instructor has had with students and what he considers to be ‘the truth’:

You are about to take the most important academic exam you have ever taken and probably will ever
take. The test is more difficult and wildly different from any exam you have taken before. You will be
competing against the smartest, hungriest, most ambitious people in the world and their only objective is to
beat you. A poor score will keep you from attending law school in this country. A great score will virtually
guarantee you access to any school and the lifestyle they afford.
These young women and men you are competing with are an impressive bunch. They are not the
smartest kids from your high school or most disciplined kids from your university. These are many of the
top students worldwide, period. And unless you beat most of them, you can start thinking of a different
career path.
Past experience amplifies our challenge. You are engaging in a task in which many of our opponents
are already superior. The Americans have spent many years surrounded by standardized tests. They are
better prepared, better educated, and more experienced.
How many moments, realistically, can you lose focus in this environment and come out on top? How
many moments can you toss away, how many “I’ll do it tomorrows”, before the American version of you
leaves you in the dust for forever?
If you are not close to 100% focused for the entire duration, you will not reach your potential. Being
100% focused on a task like this is not natural to us. We do not do this kind of reading in our everyday
life. So, if 100% focus is our goal, we will need to inject new processes in our life to compensate for a
lifetime of practice ill-suited to this job. We need to acquire the skill of “focus” rather than lament our
relative paucity of this virtue.
The alternative is to be normal or average on this task. To permit whatever reading processes we
developed earlier in life (processes not developed for this task) to be our sole guide. And normal or average
does not get us to law school, let alone the law schools of our choice.
So you decide. Tell yourself the lie that ‘this is fascinating!’ or tell yourself the truth. Tell yourself
that if you do not get better at this, someone else will, and they will probably beat you. It’s up to you.
But, at the end of the day, we need you to be 100% focused for all 35 minutes for us to have a chance at
showing what you are capable of in this test. The way you are going to build and acquire the attitude that
will get you there is something you figure out in a conversation between you and you. The determination
and passion cannot come from somewhere else. You are the CEO of this operation.

32 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | RC1

The Reading Comprehension Passage Process: Focus Points

Reading Comprehension Passage process is essentially a collection of focus points. There
are certain things that can occur in a passage that are significantly more likely to be tested.
These pieces of information that are more likely to be tested is where we want to spend a
disproportionate amount of time understanding the information.
1. Contrasts/Comparisons
○○ A contrast is a juxtaposition of two or more variables.
(Thanks for the definition! Now what does it mean in English?)
○○ Whenever a passage indicates a difference or a similarity between some variables
(usually figures central to the passage content) discussed in the passage, you want to
do two things:
1. You want to notate the contrast point by putting a circled C (e.g., © ) beside
where the contrast is occurring
2. Briefly summarize (three to five words) what the contrast is

Let’s see an example:

Beginning in the late 15th century, French and British expeditions explored, and later settled, along the Atlantic coast.
France ceded nearly all of its colonies in North America to Britain in 1763 after the Seven Years’ War. In 1867, with
the union of three British North American colonies through Confederation, Canada was formed as a federal dominion of
four provinces. This began an accretion of provinces and territories and a process of increasing autonomy from the British
Empire, which became official with the Statute of Westminster of 1931 and completed in the Canada Act of 1982,
which severed the vestiges of legal dependence on the British parliament.

-> The contrast points here are the first and second sentences; the first sentence could be summarized
as “F&B settled Atlantic Coast”; a summary for the second contrast point is “F ceded almost all to B
after SYW.”

○○ By taking the extra time to note and short form summarize the contrast points,
you are better educated as to the primary pieces of information that the test is
going to ask you about and are likely to provide select superior answer choices.

LSAT Strategy Guide 33

 RC1 | Core Concepts

2. Author’s Opinion
○○ A second part of a passage likely to be tested is the Author’s Opinion.
○○ There are two things we need to know about the author’s opinion:
1. How do we find it?
2. What if we cannot find it?

○○ There are FIVE primary ways we can come upon the author’s opinion:
i. Words that describe nouns: Adjectives and Adverbs

ii. The TONE and METHOD by which evidence is introduced

iii. Idiomatic Expressions

iv. The FUNCTION of examples

v. Concerns regarding historic and contemporary discrimination

34 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | RC1

2(i): Words that Describe a Noun: Adjectives and Adverbs

○○ E.g., Ludwig Von Beethoven, the brilliant German composer, once completed fourteen straight sold
out shows in Vienna.
○○ The author’s opinion here is that Beethoven is “brilliant.” Terms such as “brilliant”,
“astute”, or “heinous” are not facts. They are statements of belief unattached to a
universal, formalized definition.

2(ii): The Tone and Method by which Evidence is Introduced

○○ We want to become aware of HOW evidence is introduced to us. For example,
here are three different sentences attempting to provide us with the same piece of
information. All of these sentences suggest a different author’s intent.
▪▪ Sentence 1: I believe the Federal Reserve will increase interest rates to 2.5%
• The author stands behind this belief wholeheartedly by unequivocally
postulating that this was their idea with the statement “I believe.”

▪▪ Sentence 2: Experts believe the Federal Reserve will increase interest rates to 2.5%
• Why would the author tell us that “experts” believe this? By indicating that
experts, those with special skill or training in the subject matter, have this
belief, it suggests to us that the author believes this belief has significant
support.

▪▪ Sentence 3: Some believe the Federal Reserve will increase interest rates to 2.5%
• Why would the author tell us that “some” (which means “at least one person”)
believes this? The author could have told us that she or he believed it. They
could have told us that experts believed it. The author chose to do neither
of those things. Instead, the author introduced this evidence as meekly as
possible. Such an introduction suggests (though does not guarantee) that the
author DOES NOT share this opinion.

LSAT Strategy Guide 35

 RC1 | Core Concepts

2(iii): Idiomatic Expressions

○○ Idiomatic Expression (formal): An expression whose meaning cannot be discerned from
the words making it up.
○○ Idiomatic Expression (understandable): An expression that permissibly breaks the rules of
our language and gets away with it because we colloquially understand the concept
underlying the statement. The meaning of the statement often has little to do with the
formal definitions of the words involved.
○○ The author’s opinion can also show itself through even more subtle means such as an
idiom. There are over 14,000 idioms in the English language and learning them all is
not possible. However, the most popular idioms tend to see a lot of us, so, if we see
an idiom we are unfamiliar with we need to head to google and learn the meaning.
○○ Idioms often consist of just a few words in a sentence.
▪▪ E.g., I will always go to bat for Linda, she has been working alongside me for over twenty years.
▪▪ The phrase “go to bat” is an idiomatic expression meaning “to support”. This is a
statement indicating the author is, to use another idiomatic expression, in Linda’s
corner.

2(iv): Function of Examples

○○ Imagine an author has 500 words to make an argument to the rest of the world. Just
500 words! Now, please further imagine, that the author decides to use 75 of those
words in their argument on an example. The author using an example has decided
to not use that scarce and sacred space for giving new positive information about
whatever idea the author is selling and also not for directly confronting critics of their
idea either. In order for that example to be rationally given considering all the potential
sacrificed, that example should play a role in the argument that is deemed to be more
important than a direct explanation as to the relative benefits of the author’s notion.
An example is a spotlight on an issue of the argument or issue the author believes to be of high
importance.
○○ All examples serve one of three functions:
(i) Supports a point

(ii) Attacks a point

(iii) Describes a process

○○ Virtually all examples on the LSAT Reading Comprehension section will be for the
purpose of supporting or attacking a point. If we can isolate the function of the
example (i.e., why did the author decide to provide an example at this point in the
architecture of the argument) we can often isolate the point of view of the author.

36 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | RC1

2(v): Historic Discrimination and a tendency toward “Liberal” passages

○○ This is the flimsiest of the five methods for discerning the author’s opinion, but it has
proven itself reasonably reliable with regard to the Reading Comprehension section of
the LSAT.
○○ The LSAT is built to be a universal, comprehensive reasoning exam.
▪▪ It is supposed to present an even battlefield where one student’s reasoning abilities
are put up against other student’s abilities.
▪▪ To be a fair test of reasoning abilities the content of the exam is not supposed to
induce a disproportionate emotional response from a particular group of people.
▪▪ Inspiring an emotional response in only some of the test takers would cause this
to be an unfair test with regard to reasoning ability.
▪▪ The principle underlying the decision not to have prejudiced, or even ostensibly
prejudiced, passages is because such passages produce an uneven playing field.

Example: Imagine that an average 25-year-old male reads a passage about “how
women should never have been given the right to vote.” The male will probably
feel the content is anachronistic, biased, and probably immoral. But what he will
not feel is the same emotional sting that a 25-year-old woman would feel in that
circumstance. Because for all the conceptual affinity the male may have to ideals
of equality, he has not had a life time of this type of gender-based discrimination.
There were not thousands of years where, as a result of their gender, they were
legally and morally viewed as the property of another gender. In this circumstance,
the test would be unfair to the woman because the content of the passage
likely produces a disproportionate emotional response in some members of the
community.
○○ Knowing the purpose of the LSAT can help guide us toward the probable opinion of
the author of a passage.
▪▪ For the past 40 years, virtually every passage about a minority group has seen an
author’s opinion that was favorable toward the minority group under discussion.
▪▪ The opinion toward a minority protagonist seems to never be negative on the
LSAT.
○○ Whenever a passage is about a historically adversely effected group, assume the
passage supports an (American) liberal point of view. (There will usually be other
pieces of evidence to back up this proposition within the passage.)

LSAT Strategy Guide 37

 RC1 | Core Concepts

3. Summarizing the Main Point of a Paragraph

○○ After noting any contrasts or author’s opinion, our next task when reading a passage is
(at least, during our initial practice) to summarize the main point of the paragraph.
▪▪ The point here is to practice summarizing the main point of paragraphs.
▪▪ ON TEST DAY, it is likely that you WILL NOT be summarizing most (or perhaps
any) of the paragraphs.
▪▪ Summarizing the paragraphs is a PRACTICE TOOL that assists us in more
speedily and precisely synthesizing complicated information.

○○ The single most important thing most test takers can do to improve in this
section is to summarize the paragraphs.
▪▪ By “summarizing”, we mean an attempt to capture the main thrust of a paragraph
and to explain that core concept to a five-year-old.
▪▪ Summaries are meant to make complicated material easily relatable.

○○ Reading a book or magazine for fun allows us to run our eyes across the page and
capture the general concepts or flavor of a piece; the LSAT reading passages demand
more than our normal reading, so we cannot approach the reading passages with a normal
process.

○○ Paragraphs exist in order to indicate and segregate ideas.

▪▪ One paragraph is, traditionally, a vehicle for one core idea.
▪▪ The summaries we envision are attempts to capture that main idea in three to
seven words.

38 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | RC1

○○ Summarizing may not be easy at first; many who start this process will often not
summarize correctly and/or spend too much time summarizing.
▪▪ As a result, some will stop summarizing, but this is a mistake.
▪▪ We must be aware of two things:
1. In the short-term, scores will likely drop when switching methods
»» We expect this because people are generally adjusting something pretty fundamental to
their previously learned method of understanding (i.e., they are learning to read and
acquire information, something they have been doing for 20 years, in a new way).

2. In the long-term, however, even those who summarize incorrectly do a

better job of improving their scores in this section when compared with
those who do not summarize.
»» The reasons for this are threefold:
I. The attempt to summarize compels the reader to engage the material
for an additional iteration (i.e., you review what you just read).

II. The material is engaged with a specific and limited purpose (i.e., you
think about what you just read).

III. Summarizing requires the reader engage the material more closely
than every day reading compels. (i.e., you need to actually have read
what you are trying to summarize

LSAT Strategy Guide 39

 RC1 | Core Concepts

Additional Techniques to Increase Comprehension

• There are two additional techniques worth considering:
1. Checking Flow
2. Projecting the Main Point

• These 2 techniques aren’t always universally helpful, but they do assist a significant portion
of test takers with understanding the content of the passages; we suggest that you try
them out and decide, independently, whether these are useful to you.

Checking Flow
• Upon completing a passage, some experts suggest reviewing your work in order to
understand how the argument unfolded.
○○ There are nearly an infinite number of ways to write a passage and make a point; the
author chose a particular way.
○○ We want to understand what way the author chose to argue.
For example, the author may have presented a problem, posed two solutions, and rejected both
solutions as insufficient to tackle the initial problem. Or she may have introduced three ideas in the initial
paragraph, detailed the problems with all three, and then choose the best one.

○○ The point is: one method was chosen to communicate the ideas and by understanding
the method it will help us with ‘structure’ questions but also help us understand ‘why’
certain arguments and options were offered as they were, which helps us better grasp
the purposes of the author and the passage as a whole.

• This method is particularly helpful when dealing with questions that will focus on
the structure, rather than the content, of the passage, even though by reviewing the
summaries you are reviewing content as well as structure.

• The process requires us to do three things to crystallize our understanding:

Step 1: Count the number of paragraphs.

Step 2: Read the summaries of the paragraphs in order.

Step 3: Note the “flow” of the passage.

40 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts | RC1

Projecting the Main Point

• The first question you are likely to be asked after a reading comprehension passage is
“what is the main point of the passage?”
○○ As a result of this propensity, some experts suggest attempting to project the main
point of the passage immediately after finishing the passage.
○○ The rationale behind this action is that we are going to get the main point question
anyway, so we may as well figure out the answer before we get confused by the
carefully nuanced answer choices.

• Projecting the entire main point can be too broad a quest to be worthwhile, so we employ
a simplified version of this process.
○○ Instead of projecting the entirety of the main point, note “what concepts must a main
point for this passage cover?”
○○ Just by noting the central ideas, we can often significantly narrow down the potentially
correct answer choices.

• The primary reason we address this method, however, is to considert “main point”
questions and the two rules that govern them.
○○ Picking the particular correct main point answer choice often seems more art than
science to test takers.
○○ In contrast to other parts of the test, like logic games, the reading comprehension
questions really are more subjective.
○○ Here are some guiding points:
1. A main point correct answer choice must be true according to the passage.

No matter how wonderful an answer choice is, if anything in the answer choice does not need
to be true according to the passage, it is a wrong answer.

2. A main point correct answer choice must deal with most of the passage.
• Most people are trained to write in a manner that sees the thesis in the first
paragraph and the conclusion in the final paragraph.
• As a result of this ubiquitous formula, many incorrectly assume that the most
important parts of a passage are at the beginning and the end with everything
in between being “filler.”
• That “filler” is also known as the “rationale” and is central to what is being
tested on this exam.

LSAT Strategy Guide 41

 RC1 | Core Concepts

NOTES

42 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts: Conditional Logic | LG2

LG2 | Core Concepts: Conditional Logic and Grouping Games

Goals
1. Introduce Basic Conditional Logic
2. Practice Conditional Logic
3. Work through Grouping Games with Conditional Logic.

Introduction to Conditional Logic for Logic Games

• An understanding of conditional logic is necessary to get a top score on this exam.
○○ Conditional logic is a reasoning structure that effects both the logic games and the
logical reasoning sections.
○○ Moreover, grouping games involving conditional logic are often viewed as the most
challenging logic games the LSAT offers.
○○ Grouping games employing conditional logic offer two issues that act as a potential
stumbling block for test takers:
1. Most people have never heard of conditional logic; we will go over the basic rules
behind this reasoning structure.
2. The speed at which a test taker must employ conditional logic requires a
comprehensive “like the back of your hand” understanding of the rules of
conditional logic. The simplicity of learning the rules can mask how hard you’ll
need to work to have a flawless comprehension of them.

• Also known as ‘if/then statements’ and ‘sufficient/necessary logic’, ‘conditional logic’ for
logic games is a baby step into the world of formal logic.
○○ Although this section may sound intimidating, this portion of conditional logic is
actually fairly simple.
○○ We will only need to memorize a couple of rules to understand the relevant concepts.

• Conditional Logic is a reasoning structure that sets up a condition under which, if a

certain act occurs (the sufficient condition) then another act must occur (the necessary
condition).

An example: If you are a human, then you are a mammal.

In order to follow this rule, we need to recognize that in all circumstances that someone is a
human (the sufficient condition), they are also a mammal (the necessary condition).
The sufficient condition guarantees the necessary condition.

LSAT Strategy Guide 43

 LG2 | Core Concepts: Conditional Logic

Basic Conditional Logic – The Contrapositive

What Is the Contrapositive?

• After mastering basic sufficient-necessary statements, we can move on to the information

we can extrapolate from those statements.

○○ The most basic and important extrapolation is discovering the contrapositive.

○○ Every conditional logic statement also offers us the Contrapositive of that

statement.

• The Contrapositive is the original sufficient-necessary statement flipped and negated.

○○ A formal logic definition would state that the contrapositive of the statement has its
consequent and antecedent inverted and flipped.

○○ For the sake of simplicity, all you need to do is “flip and negate” the sufficient and
necessary conditions.

○○ Continuing the previous example: If you are a human, then you are a mammal.

The original statement could be written out as:

If H  M

(If you are human, then you are a mammal)

The contrapositive of the statement requires us to “flip and negate”:

If ≠M  ≠H

(If you are not a mammal, then you are not a human)

44 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts: Conditional Logic | LG2

Why Do We Care About the Contrapositive?

• You want to notate (using shorthand symbols and arrows to denote the sufficient-
necessary relationship) both the original statement and the contrapositive.
• Every single time you write out a rule for a logic game you want to write out both.
○○ The reason you want to write out both is because the question stems and deductions
that the game provides may give us the sufficient condition of the original statement
and/or the sufficient condition in the contrapositive.
○○ During the game, we need to see these deductions as fast as possible, which is why
they need to be written out.
An example: If you play in the NBA, then you are tall.
Should look like:
If NBA  Tall
If ≠Tall  ≠NBA

LSAT Strategy Guide 45

 LG2 | Core Concepts: Conditional Logic

Basic Conditional Logic – Avoiding Traps

• There are two primary ways the LSAT will try to trick you during conditional logic
questions.
○○ The test will often offer students either an Incorrect Negation and/or an Incorrect
Reversal.
○○ Either mistake will lead to a wrong answer.

• An Incorrect Negation occurs when the sufficient and necessary conditions of a

conditional statement are negated but not flipped.
An example:
Original Statement: If you are Cola, then you have sugar.
Incorrect negation: If you are not a Cola, then you do not have sugar.
○○ The incorrect negation cannot be validly deduced from the original statement.
○○ Given the original statement, it is still entirely possible to not be a cola and still have
sugar.

• An Incorrect Reversal occurs when the sufficient and necessary conditions of a

conditional statement are flipped but not negated.
An example:
Original Statement: If you are Cola, then you have sugar.
Incorrect Reversal: If you have sugar, then you have a cola.
○○ The Incorrect Reversal cannot be validly deduced from the original statement.
○○ Given the original statement, it is still entirely possible to have sugar and not have a
cola (for instance, you might have a chocolate bar).

46 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts: Conditional Logic | LG2

Basic Conditional Logic – And / Or Statements

• The And/Or rule is central to understanding the Contrapositive.
• The rule is that every ‘and’ is turned into an ‘or’ (and vice versa) when writing out
the contrapositive.
An example:
Original Statement: If you are Ryan Gosling, then you are handsome and sensitive.
Correct Contrapositive: If you are not handsome or not sensitive, you are not Ryan Gosling.
One way to make this point more understandable is to repeat the original sentence
about Ryan Gosling and then say, “There is a guy over there that is definitely not
handsome. Given the first statement, what can we know about that person?” The answer:
“He’s not Ryan Gosling.” Just because that person lacked one factor we knew it was not
Ryan Gosling. If the necessary condition contains an “and” then the contrapositive must
be switched to “or”.

Conditional Logic | Example Game

Example Game is found on Page 213.

The Four Step Process

Step 1: Write the Stimulus Rules
Exactly six doctors: J, K, L, N, O, P
At Exactly one of two clinics: S/R

This is the classic indication of a grouping game. There are six variables and all the variables are
at one of two places (S or R). There is no sequencing and no other consideration - just a bunch of
variables that need to be in one of two spots.

Step 2: Draw out the Universal Diagram

(Can we draw the diagram in here? It’s just a cross)

The Universal diagram for every grouping game is the same. One of the frustrating things about
conditional games is that at the end of this four part process, the universal diagram will remain empty.

LSAT Strategy Guide 47

 LG2 | Core Concepts: Conditional Logic

Step 3: Write out the Indented Rules

Js  Kr
Ks  Jr

J r  Os
Or  J s

Ls  Nr and Pr
Ns or Ps  Lr

Nr  Or
Os  Ns

Pr  Ks and Os
Kr or Or  Ps

This is ten separate lines worth of rules. Note how long this will take if there is
any confusion about how we write the rules. The hardest part about this type of
game is knowing the rules governing conditional logic so well that you can write and
use indented rules quickly and flawlessly.
Also note that it is often easier for student to effectively use the indented rules
if they only pay attention to the sufficient condition. I recommend
students use their pencil to cover the necessary conditions and ignore them UNTIL
a sufficient condition is triggered. Otherwise, the students are likely to make
incorrect negations and incorrect reversals.
Students must read these rules from left to right. A sufficient condition triggers a
necessary condition. Reading them right to left will give a student the wrong answer.
A necessary condition will not yield any further deductions.

48 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts: Conditional Logic | LG2

Step 4: Make Deductions

○○ There are no deductions when all the rules are conditional logic.
Remember, these are all “if/then” rules. If X happens, then Y happens.
Until X happens, though, nothing has happened! There are no pure rules here,
only conditional rules.

○○ Avoid writing out transitive chains!!!

Many test takers waste time as a result of cleverness. They see something like this:
If we have Ks then we have Jr ; with Jr we get Os; with Os we guarantee Ns;
and with Ns we must have Lr.
So the person has seen that:
Ks  Jr  Os  Ns  Lr

Finding conditional logic chains is often a ridiculous waste of time.

When the game needs you to find a chain, they will induce a chain (i.e., they will
provide a sufficient condition). If test takers start writing out chains before they
need to, they will waste time and lower their score.
Be careful not to mistakenly confuse these chains with “deductions.”

○○ A deduction is a new valid conclusion that can be created by combining two or

more premises.

○○ Conditional logic games virtually never yield deductions because there is nothing
that has happened in the rules, only contingencies for what results from an action.
There is no original action.

LSAT Strategy Guide 49

 LG2 | Core Concepts: Conditional Logic

Conditional Logic | Example Game

Process, Questions, and Answers for Page 213.

Question 19: List Question

• Among grouping games, the “List question” represents the only major difference in how
we want to treat grouping games as a whole.

• What do you notice about the List question on pages 212 and 213. What are the
differences?
○○ Page 212 lists all the variables while Page 213 lists only half of the variables.
○○ We need to recognize this difference to understand our different responses to group
game list questions.

• Normally, a list question compels us to employ a “rules based approach” and knock off
answer choices that violate an indented rule.
○○ For group game questions, we have one more preliminary step.
○○ Write out the missing variables before applying the Rules Based Approach.
Example:
Page 213, Question 19

Which one of the following could be a complete and accurate list of the doctors that
are at Souderton?

(A) Juarez, Kudrow, Onawa L, N, P

(B) J, N, O, P K, L

(C) K, L, O J, N, P

(D) N, O J, K, L, P

(E) N, P J, K, L, O

50 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts: Conditional Logic | LG2

○○ After we write out the “missing” variables that would need to be in the other group,
then we apply the Indented Rules:

Rule (1) knocks out answer choice (A).

Rule (2) knocks out answer choice (E).

Rule (3) knocks out nothing.

Rule (4) knocks out answer choice (C).

Rule (5) knocks out answer choice (D).

»» Therefore, answer choice (B) is the correct answer.

Question 20: Local Question

If Palermo is at Randsborough, then which one of the following must be true?

Step 1: Write the rule and put it in the diagram

Souderton Randsborough
P

Step 2: Make Deductions

Souderton Randsborough
K, O, N P, J, L

○○ If P is at Randsborough, rule 5 tells us that K and O are at Souderton.

○○ If O is at Souderton, rule 4 tells us that N is that Souderton.

○○ If K is at Souderton, rule 1 tells us J is at Randsborough.

○○ If N is at Souderton, rule 3 tells us L is at Randsborough.

Step 3: Check Answer Choices

With the information from Step 2, we know that answer choice (A) is correct.

LSAT Strategy Guide 51

 LG2 | Core Concepts: Conditional Logic

Question 21: Non-Local Question

What is the minimum number of doctors that could be a Souderton?

Step 1: Check Universal Diagram

Universal diagram is empty.

Step 2: Do a Hypothetical Sweep

Our hypothetical sweep requires us to look at valid hypotheticals provided in

Questions 19 and 20:

○○ Question 19 answer choice (B) indicates that we can have 4 doctors at Souderton.

»» We can eliminate no answers with this information.

○○ Question 20 hypothetical indicates that we can have 3 doctors at Souderton.

»» We can eliminate answer choice (E) with this information.

Step 3: Square of Opposites Approach

○○ Remember that on maximum /minimum questions, you will first experiment with
a hypothetical that best satisfies the condition under inspection (i.e., if the test asks
for the minimum, test the minimum first; if they ask for the maximum, test the
maximum first).

○○ Test out answer choice (A) even though you may already KNOW it is wrong;
knowing WHY it is wrong is the information we are after.

Answer Choice (A) Hypothetical

Souderton Randsborough
J, K, L, N, O, P

○○ The reason answer choice (A) is wrong is because it violates the second
indented rule (i.e., If Jr  Os).

▪▪ This is important because it points out the troublemakers.

▪▪ If we want the next answer choice to succeed, it will require us changing

either J or O!

▪▪ This provides us with the guidance necessary to test answer choice (B).

52 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts: Conditional Logic | LG2

Answer Choice (B) Hypotheticals

Souderton Randsborough
O J, K, L, N, P
J K, L, N, O, P

○○ Both potential hypotheticals for answer choice (B) prove impossible.

○○ So what next? In order to have the “minimum” number in Souderton, you want
to ensure that all those variables that push a lot of things into Souderton don’t
happen.

Answer Choice (C) Hypothetical

○○ So which variables push a lot of things into Soudteron?

▪▪ If Pr occurs, two things go into Souderton.

▪▪ So let’s move P out of Randsborough and into Souderton.

▪▪ Also, if Jr occurs then Os happens which also forces Ns.

Souderton Randsborough
P, J K, L, N, O

▪▪ Therefore, Answer Choice (C) is correct.

LSAT Strategy Guide 53

 LG2 | Core Concepts: Conditional Logic

Question 22: Local Question

If Nance and Onawa are at different clinics, which one of the following must be true?

Step 1: Write the rule

If N and O are at different clinics, then N must be at Souderton and O must be at

Randsborough. We know this because of the fourth indented rule.

Step 2: Make Deductions

○○ If Ns then Lr

○○ If Or then Js. If Js then Kr, if Kr then Ps

Souderton Randsborough
N, J, P K, L, O

Step 3: Check Answer Choices

You have a complete hypothetical. The correct answer choice is (A).

Question 23: Non-Local Question

Which one of the following CANNOT be a pair of doctors at Randsborough?

Step 1: Check your Universal diagram

Universal diagram is empty.

Step 2: Do a Hypothetical Sweep

Our hypothetical sweep requires us to look at valid hypotheticals provided in

Questions 19, 20, and 21.

o Question 20 hypothetical indicates that we can have J and P can be at

Randsborough; therefore, Answer Choice (B) can be knocked out.

o Question 21 hypothetical indicates that we can have K, L, N, and O at

Randsborough; therefore, Answer Choices (C) and (D) can be knocked out.

54 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts: Conditional Logic | LG2

Step 3: Square of Opposites Approach

○○ CANNOT be = Must be False.

The opposite of ‘Must be False’ is ‘Could be True’.

○○ Test Answer Choice (A) by seeing if J and K can be at R together:

If JrOs

If OsNs

If NsLr

If KrPs

Souderton Randsborough
O, N, P J, K, L

○○ Answer choice (A) works, therefore it could be true, So we need to knock it out.

○○ Therefore, the correct answer choice is (E).

LSAT Strategy Guide 55

 LG2 | Core Concepts: Conditional Logic

Question 24: Local Question

If Kudrow is at Souderton, then which one of the following must be true?

Step 1: Write the Rule

K is at Souderton.

Step 2: Make Deductions

If Ks  Jr

If Jr  Os

If Os  Ns

If Ns  Lr

Souderton Randsborough
K, O, N J, L

Note that (P) is a free agent. A free agent is a variable that is not forced into any position.
In this hypothetical (P) is forced into neither category so it could go anywhere.

Step 3: Check Answer Choices

As the hypothetical above indicates, answer choice (B) is the correct answer.

56 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts: Conditional Reasoning | LR2

LR2 | Core Concepts: Conditional Reasoning

Goals
1. Introduce Advanced Conditional Logic
2. Practice Advanced Conditional Logic in Theory
3. Practice Advanced Conditional Logic in LSAT Questions.
4. Learn Parallel Reasoning Process.

Introduction to Advanced Conditional Logic

• The reason conditional logic on the logical reasoning portion of the exam is “advanced” is
because there are more words that trigger the specific sufficient-necessary relationship in
this section, than in the logic games; the actual logic part is no more complicated.

• With Logic Games, we learned about “if/then” rules and the “and/or rule for con-
trapositives”; we will now expand our understanding to include other common terms that
indicate a conditional logic relationship is occurring in the stimulus.

New Sufficient-Necessary Terms

• Sufficient Condition Keywords:

If, All, Any, Every, In order to, The only, To be, When, Whenever

o Note the term, The only, whose importance should become more apparent after re-
viewing the Necessary Condition Keywords (NEXT PAGE).

o Examples of terms that always indicate a sufficient condition:

1. The day will be nice when the sun shines. (If Ss  Dn)

2. In order to beat the test, Alice had to study religiously. (If Bt  Sr)

3. Every dog has its day (If Dog  Day)

LSAT Strategy Guide 57

 LR2 | Core Concepts: Conditional Reasoning

• Necessary Condition Keywords:

Then, Must, Only, Only if, Only when, Requires, Depends upon, Until, Unless.

○○ “Only”: Only, Only if, and Only when all indicate a necessary condition; The only, however,
indicates a sufficient conclusion.

»» Memorize this difference; the fact that the term The only is usually used at the be-
ginning of sentences makes the distinction easier.

○○ Until vs. unless: These terms can be fairly complicated (especially if their function isn’t
fully understood); both have an identical logical function, which does two things:

1. Indicates the necessary condition.

2. Negates the sufficient condition.

Example: The Conservatives will win the election unless the other parties form a bloc.

▪▪ Unless indicates the necessary condition.

»» As soon as we see unless, we draw out an arrow ()

»» Whatever is after unless goes to the right of the arrow

For our example:

???  Other parties form a bloc.

▪▪ Unless also negates the sufficient condition.

In our example, the final form of the sentence would be:

If the conservatives do not win the election, then the other parties formed a bloc.

(If ~Cw  Bf).

58 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts: Conditional Reasoning | LR2

○○ If and only if vs. if but only if: These expressions have the same logical meaning; the
difficulty with these expressions is best shown with an example.

Example: A if and only if B

If always indicates the sufficient condition, which would imply ‘B’ is the sufficient
condition in this statement.

But Only if always indicates the necessary condition.

How can the variable placeholder ‘B’ be both the sufficient and necessary condition?

▪▪ If and only if actually comprises two statements:

1. A if B

2. A only if B.

▪▪ Breaking these statements down:

1. A if B means (B  A and ~A  ~B)

2. A only if B means (A  B and ~B  ~A)

▪▪ When these statements are combined they indicate that if you have ‘A’ you must
have ‘B’ and if you have ‘B’ then you must have ‘A’; Unlike in a traditional suffi-
cient-necessary statement, both of these variables need to travel together!

▪▪ We represent this special relationship with a double arrow, so A if and only if B is

written logically as (A  B and ~B  ~A).

LSAT Question Practice

We will go over the three types of questions where we most commonly see conditional logic:

1. Inference Questions

2. Assumption Questions

3. Parallel Reasoning Questions.

LSAT Strategy Guide 59

 LR2 | Core Concepts: Conditional Reasoning

Inference Question Process

1. Read Stimulus and Question stem.

2. Draw out Stimulus.

3. Find potential conclusions.

4. Check answer choices.

Inference Question Practice | P. 59 (#18)

This first question will, hopefully, open up your eyes to what conditional logic can do for you
on the LSAT.

Step 1: Read Stimulus and Question Stem.

○○ The stimulus is notable because of the number of conditional logic terms.

○○ There is an inference stimulus.

Step 2: Draw out the Stimulus

○○ P1: If there are any inspired musical performances in the concert, the audience
will be treated to a good show.

»» “If ” introduces a sufficient condition; therefore, IMP is the sufficient

condition. (IMP --> GS)

○○ P2: But there will not be a good show unless there are sophisticated listeners in
the audience.

»» “Unless” indicates a necessary condition and negates the sufficient condition;

‘sophisticated listeners’ is the necessary condition; ‘Will not be a good show’ is
the sufficient condition and needs to be negated. (GS  SL)

○○ P3: And to be a sophisticated listener one must understand one’s musical roots.

»» “To be” indicates a sufficient condition; “Must” indicates a necessary

condition; “sophisticated listener” is a sufficient condition; and “one’s musical
oots” is a necessary condition. (SL  MR)

60 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts: Conditional Reasoning | LR2

○○ Putting the three premises together we get:

P1: IMP  GS

P2: GS  SL

P3: SL  MR

C: ???

○○ The transitive chain we can develop from this is:

IMP  GS  SL  MR

○○ And the contrapositive of this chain (remember, reverse and negate!):

~MR  ~SL  ~GS  ~IMP

Step 3: Find Potential Conclusions

○○ A valid conclusion, or inference, is a new piece of information that must be true. Any two
variables going from left to right, with at least one space in between them, is an
inference.

○○ In other words, there are two potential transitive chains (both saying the same thing):

IMP  GS  SL  MR

And

~MR  ~SL  ~GS  ~IMP

»» From these two chains you can garner six possible conclusions.

IMP  SL

IMP  MR

GS  MR

~MR  ~GS

~MR  ~IMP

~SL  ~IMP

LSAT Strategy Guide 61

 LR2 | Core Concepts: Conditional Reasoning

Step 4: Check Answer Choices

○○ Check the answer choices to see whether any of these conclusions exists.
Answer choice (A), the correct answer, is ~SL --> ~IMP.

○○ Test takers often get the answer fairly quickly after going through the stimulus. In
order to practice more, it is recommended to write out the other answer choices in
conditional logic form. Of particular interest on this question are answer choices
(B) and (D).

»» From a logic perspective, those answers say the exact same thing. Without
conditional logic, it would be quite difficult to see the overwhelming similarity.
This helps people know that what they are learning is necessary and valuable.

○○ A question that is often asked is if it is possible for a premise to also be a con-

clusion. For instance, if an answer choice said “If we have a good show, we are
sure to have sophisticated listeners” people might point out that such a fact is true
according to the premises and is therefore something we can conclude.

»» This is circular reasoning and is invalid. A conclusion must be a new piece of

information.

62 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts: Conditional Reasoning | LR2

Assumption Question Process

1. Read Stimulus and Question Stem.

2. Draw out Stimulus.

3. Find potential assumptions. (two-step process)

4. Check answer choices.

Sufficient Assumption Question Practice | P. 91 (#10)

• We can notice difference and overwhelming similarity between an assumption and an

inference question by looking at two simple math problems:

2 + 3 = ??? and 5 + ??? = 7

(Inference) (Assumption)

1. The first of these two problems is an inference question. We are given all the
premises (2 + 3) and must determine what new piece of information we can glean
from this combination.

2. The second of these two problems is like an assumption question. We are given a
premise and the conclusion, but we need to determine what other premise is going to
insure the validity of that conclusion.

Step 1: Read Stimulus and Question Stem.

○○ The question stem lets us know this is an assumption question. That means there must
be a conclusion and at least one premise. Make sure to use the premise / conclusion
keywords to determine the premise and conclusion.

»» The conclusion is after the phrase “It follows that …”

LSAT Strategy Guide 63

 LR2 | Core Concepts: Conditional Reasoning

Step 2: Draw out Stimulus

○○ P1: If something would have been justifiably regretted if it had occurred, then it is
something one should not have desired in the first place.

»» “If ” introduces the sufficient condition. “Then” introduces a necessary

condition. So “justifiably regretted” is the sufficient condition and “not desired” is
the necessary condition.

(JR  ~D)

○○ C: It follow that many foregone pleasures should not have been desired in the
first place.

»» This is a tougher sentence to use conditional logic because it lacks any traditional
verbiage indicating the sufficient and necessary condition. Therefore, in order to
determine the relationship between the variables we need to ask “if this was an
“if/then” sentence, how would it read?” The answer is “If you are many foregone
pleasures, then you should not have been desired in the first place.”

»» The rationale for this is “should not have been desired” is a necessary consequence
of “many foregone pleasures” according to the sentence.

(Many FP  ~D)

○○ Putting these elements together we get:

P1: JR  ~D
P2: ??? Assumption necessary
C: Many FP  ~D

64 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts: Conditional Reasoning | LR2

Step 3: Find Potential Assumptions (two-part process)

1. Determine if conclusion contains new variable.

▪▪ The first part of Step 3 is to determine which variables must be in the conclusion.
The first rule we must following when determining which variables will need to
be in the assumption answer choice, is if a new variable is introduced in the conclusion, it
must be in the assumption. Otherwise, it is impossible for us to come to a conclusion
that we have learned nothing about. If the variables is not present explicitly, it
must be part of the assumption is we have any hope of a valid argument.

»» The new variable in the conclusion for this question is “foregone

pleasures.” Therefore, all answer choices that lack “foregone pleasures”
are wrong answers.
This allows us to knock out answer choices (A) and (E).

2. Determine the variables mentioned only once.

▪▪ The second part of step 3 is to determine which variables are only mentioned
once.
Those variables will usually be your assumption variables. For larger arguments
(i.e., arguments with two premises or more), the second part of step 3 may not be
dispositive. However, when we have the format this question provides (i.e., one
premise, one conclusion) we will always be able to determine which variables need
to be in the assumption.

»» The two variables mentioned only once are “foregone pleasures” and
“justifiably regretted.” Therefore, all answer choices that lack both of these
variables need to be disposed of. This permits us to knock out an additional
answer choice (C).

»» We need to use the variables mentioned only once because, eventually, we will
need to construct the same transitive chain we saw in the earlier inference
question. And in order to create a chain, we need variables that act as both a
sufficient and necessary condition. So they must be present twice.

LSAT Strategy Guide 65

 LR2 | Core Concepts: Conditional Reasoning

Step 4: Check Answer Choices

○○ After we have determined the variables (in this case, FP and JR) we need to
determine their logical relationship. In order to do this, let’s look back at what we
know AND what we need to know.

»» We know one premise (JR  ~D). We also know we will have to end up at the
conclusion (Many FP  ~D). So I write this on the board.

Many FP ?????????????????????????????  ~D

»» We know where we need to get. Now let’s add that one premise.

Many FP ????????????????? JR  ~D

○○ Now we are getting closer to a complete transitive chain. What relationship between
the two missing variables would get us there?

Many FP  JR  ~D

»» The relationship above would create the transitive chain we need for a valid
conclusion! Therefore, our answer is going to be Many FP  JR.
This answer choice is correctly represented by option (D).

○○ The only other option (B) posits a different relationship.

»» (B) Foregone pleasures that were not desired should not have been justifiably
regretted. The first problem with (B) is it does not contain the variable “foregone
pleasures”. Instead, it contains a subset of that variable. “Foregone pleasures that
were not desired” is only a portion of “foregone pleasures” and may or may not
be related to the term “Many foregone pleasures”. It’s a new variable and, thus,
cannot be our assumption. A completely new variable can never be introduced
in a correct conditional logic assumption answer choice.

»» A second problem with (B) is that, even if the variables were the same, the
relationship established would not guarantee the validity of the conclusion.
Assuming the first problem with (B) did not exist, the relationship would be
FP  ~JR. Unfortunately, the variable ‘~JR’, even with contrapositives, is
never a sufficient condition in any premise and, thus, will not lead to our final
necessary condition, ‘~D’.

66 LSAT Strategy Guide

 Core Concepts: Conditional Reasoning | LR2

Parallel Reasoning Question Process

1. Read Stimulus and Question Stem.

2. Draw out Stimulus.

3. Contrast Stimulus Conclusion Structure with Answer Choice Conclusion Structure.

4. Contrast Stimulus Premise Structure with Answer Choice Premise Structure.

5. Contrast Stimulus Quantifying Terms with Answer Choice Quantifying Terms.

Parallel Reasoning Question Practice | P. 123 (#16)

Step 1: Read Stimulus and Question Stem.

• The question stem confirms that this is a Parallel Reasoning question. All parallel
reasoning questions must have premises and a conclusion.

• The term “hence” indicates the conclusion.

Step 2: Draw out Stimulus

○○ P1: “Retailers that excel in neither convenience nor variety of merchandise tend not to
be very successful.”

»» There is no obvious verbiage that indicates a sufficient or necessary variable

is present. It is occasionally necessary, particularly on the most difficult
questions, to create conditional relationships where the language used
does not require you to map those relationships. Thus, in order to establish
a sufficiency-necessary relationship, we must do our best to turn this sentence
into an “if/then” sentence.

»» The declaration indicates that “If a retailer excels in neither convenience nor
variety of merchandise, then they tend not to be very successful.”

▪▪ This relationship is more likely the meaning than any of the alternatives. For
example, Indicating that “very successful” was a sufficient condition instead
of what it really is, the sentence would be suggesting that people who tend not
to be very successful are these negligent retailers. But that’s both clearly untrue
(poor retailers hardly have the market on a lack of success cornered) and not
intended by the structure of the sentence.

○○ Sentance mapping: ~CE and ~VE  tend ~SR

LSAT Strategy Guide 67

 LR2 | Core Concepts: Conditional Reasoning

○○ Read out loud, it would be: “If (you) do not excel in convenience and do not excel in
variety, then you tend not to be very successful.”

• Please see note on “Universal qualifiers” to see about treatment of Retailers. This is a
common tactic we want to learn about in order to simplify our approach to these difficult
questions.

• Remember that “neither/nor” always means “And”.

Separate Out This Portion

• Universal Variables: Retailers …

○○ P2: “Yet many successful retailers excel in just one of the areas and meet competitors’
standards for the other.”

Many SR  only CE or only VE

○○ C: “Hence, a retailer’s success need not depend on excellence in both areas.”

SR  don’t need C and V

The argument together:

P1: ~CE and ~VE  tend ~SR

P2: Many SR only CE or only VE

______________________________________________

C: SR  don’t need C and V

68 LSAT Strategy Guide